Thread: Questioning chirine ba kal

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

This - what he said. "Tractics" is a very, very good simulation of WWII armored combat, and still holds up as well today as it did back then. For all I know, somebody has ported it over to a computer, which does all the number-crunching for the GM.

What I am hoping to be able to say is that all through this game, I never looked at the rules. After I got the movement rates off the reference sheet, I simply got on with the mission. That's why I think there's a difference between 'playing the game', which I was not doing, and 'fighting my battle', which I was.

We had, back then, a very different approach to our gaming, and I don't know if there's a good way to demonstrate or show that.

Of course it helped that you'd also studied the period fairly extensively, including the books that Resse and Tucker used to create the rules, and gave the rest of us those books as well.

You didn't NEED to look at the rules, you knew damn well that a Panther was going to laugh at a 75mm gun Sherman.

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

Of course it helped that you'd also studied the period fairly extensively, including the books that Resse and Tucker used to create the rules, and gave the rest of us those books as well.

You didn't NEED to look at the rules, you knew damn well that a Panther was going to laugh at a 75mm gun Sherman.

All very true, of course. I thought that if we were going to put in all that time and effort to run these games, it might be useful for us to know something about the thing. See also your extensive researches and practical work in medieval subjects - your work was every bit as thorough and detailed as Dave Arneson's was for his Age of Sail and ACW gaming. I did the same thing for my "Star Wars" campaign, and I think a lot of us did the same for particular game scenarios and settings that interested us.

Yeah, I knew from the set-up that I was in for it. I just rose to the occasion, I think.

You know, something that was said at the last Gary Con just struck me, when it was suggested that I put on another version of The Great Mos Eisley Spaceport Raid. You remarked, quite accurately, that that game was five years in the making, what with the collection and painting of all the miniatures I used; we both thought aloud that games like that might not be possible to stage, any more, due to the effort involved. And, quite frankly, from what I perceive to be a lack of interest in that kind of thing, anymore.

I'm not talking about a lack of miniatures - I can still supply a major game for a major battle set in Tekumel out of stock, for example - but a lack of interested players. I had a heck of a time getting anyone to come to the last (and it may very well be the last) Braunstein I did at FFG; people commented afterwards that while the game itself took over five hours to play, this wasn't a big problem as I told all sorts of entertaining stories about the early days of gaming.

My perception, based on what I see at the FLGS and the occasional convention, is that people seem to want short, fast games; a four-hour game is considered long, but then it also seems to be expected that the GM will use about a half-hour to brief in the players on the world setting and hand out the fact sheets and 'pre-gen' PC sheets.

I have a suspicion, Glorious General, that the days of the kind of 'generalist' gaming that you and I did are over and done with. I dunno; I hear lots of talk about 'recapturing the spirit' of the old days, but I haven't seen a lot of it on the ground...

Ah, well; we did have fun, didn't we?

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

All very true, of course. I thought that if we were going to put in all that time and effort to run these games, it might be useful for us to know something about the thing. See also your extensive researches and practical work in medieval subjects - your work was every bit as thorough and detailed as Dave Arneson's was for his Age of Sail and ACW gaming. I did the same thing for my "Star Wars" campaign, and I think a lot of us did the same for particular game scenarios and settings that interested us.

Yeah, I knew from the set-up that I was in for it. I just rose to the occasion, I think.

You know, something that was said at the last Gary Con just struck me, when it was suggested that I put on another version of The Great Mos Eisley Spaceport Raid. You remarked, quite accurately, that that game was five years in the making, what with the collection and painting of all the miniatures I used; we both thought aloud that games like that might not be possible to stage, any more, due to the effort involved. And, quite frankly, from what I perceive to be a lack of interest in that kind of thing, anymore.

I'm not talking about a lack of miniatures - I can still supply a major game for a major battle set in Tekumel out of stock, for example - but a lack of interested players. I had a heck of a time getting anyone to come to the last (and it may very well be the last) Braunstein I did at FFG; people commented afterwards that while the game itself took over five hours to play, this wasn't a big problem as I told all sorts of entertaining stories about the early days of gaming.

My perception, based on what I see at the FLGS and the occasional convention, is that people seem to want short, fast games; a four-hour game is considered long, but then it also seems to be expected that the GM will use about a half-hour to brief in the players on the world setting and hand out the fact sheets and 'pre-gen' PC sheets.

I have a suspicion, Glorious General, that the days of the kind of 'generalist' gaming that you and I did are over and done with. I dunno; I hear lots of talk about 'recapturing the spirit' of the old days, but I haven't seen a lot of it on the ground...

Ah, well; we did have fun, didn't we?

Yes, there are games aimed specifically at one-shots, these days. Some of them are pretty good.
Then again, there are games aimed specifically at longer campaigns. The demand hasn't gone away. It's just that the market tries to accommodate both groups, because you know, it's a market. It wants everyone's money!
(Fun fact: one-shot RPGs are, from what I know, the rule in places like Japan. I think it says much more about the schedules of Japanese gamers being hard to coordinate, and/or about them consuming more "episode-based media" that they want to emulate, than it says about their dedication to the games).

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

Good question, Eager Young Space Cadet.

First, as a general rule of thumb, the defense has approximately a 3:1 advantage in most circumstances in most periods.

Secondly, yes, the German tanks had a substantial technical advantage. By this time even Mark IVs had a long 75 mm gun; though they weren't heavily armored by any means, this means that they could knock out a Sherman with a 75mm gun at a range farther away than the Sherman could counter, and they were pretty much even-up with Sherman with the improved 76mm gun.

The Panther is just plain nasty; sloped armor makes it tough to kill from the front even for the Sherman 76mm, and the Panther's 75/L70 actually had better penetration than the Tiger I's 88; the Panther will open a Sherman up like a can of sardines at any range it can see it, and even a 76mm gun Sherman needs to get fairly close to have a chance from the front. A 75mm Sherman ain't doing squat from the front and needs to be within 500 yards or so from the flank, which is getting pretty darn close.

One on one the German tanks were better, and when you add in the advantage of prepared defensive positions the usual kill ratio is about 2:1 or 3:1.

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/405605510169170013/

And Chirine's point about "stop whining and fight the battle" is dead on too.

EDIT: To clarify, the rules reflect this. ANY historical war game should reflect the capabilities of the units involved. Treating the Sherman and the Panther identically would be like treating a guy in leather armor and hand axe the same as a guy in plate armor and bastard sword.

Just a propos to your edit, there are games that treat those the same...
No, I don't understand the logic either.

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

I think for Asen's sake, not being familiar with the game, I'd add that TRACTICS uses historical gun and armor data. Thus if the Sherman gun "using the M62 APC round, the 76mm gun penetrated 109 mm (4.3 in) of armor at 1,000 m (3,300 ft)," that was incorporated into Tractics. Cumbersome I admit; there were 5 range bands from Point Blank to Extreme, and three sub bands within each band, each with a penetration number. And EVERY tank had a full set of armor data. Suspension armor and hull flank armor were not necessarily the same, never mind the turret and which way is the turret facing! And is the tank angled to you so that there is some horizontal slope to the armor as well as the vertical?

That's why I was so busy during the game as referee. But the good news is it gives you a damn good simulation of what happens when the tungsten hits the steel.

It also shows why, at Gary Con, Tractics author Mike Reese runs a game where there are fewer than 10 vehicles total on the board. No dummy, he.

Wait. Wait. Wait!
So the first post was the mechanics?
...yeah, great. Now you made me want to play that. Or something similar for battles in Antiquity, if I'm dreaming anyway.
And I don't know anyone who has heard of it, even among wargamers...
(I suspect I might end up like I do with less-known systems: First I run them, and people play because it's on offer. Then I run them, and people want to play. Then people are running them, and if I'm lucky, I still want to play them).

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

Yep. I fought the battle - not that I don;t say, 'played the game', at what at best was a 3:1 disadvantage, and at worst maybe a 9:1 to 15:1 disadvantage. It all depended on how you crunched the numbers.

I didn't crunch the numbers. I was a US armored regiment commander, given the task of getting help to the besieged paratroopers up the road. Give that mission, I fought the battle the bast way I knew how, with what I had to hand. I used my forces the way Lesey McNair had designed them to fight the Germans, and the enemy was kind enough to stand there with their mouths hanging open while I did what the American Army did best in WWII - smother them in massive amounts of firepower, and kill them.

Please read that second sentence again, if you would:

"I was a US armored regiment commander"

Yes, you guessed it. I was role-playing. I had 'immersion'; I was standing on a crummy little road in Belgium, freezing my butt off, and up to my ankles in cold wet mud. So, yes, I had 'immersion', all right; that's what we all did, back in those days - we got into our roles as the people we were playing, no matter what the game and setting might be. My two air commanders, who fought the air combat side of this game, were your typical swaggering 'fifty-mission crush' types and did their jobs with speed and dispatch; the Luftwaffe never know what hit them.

We did this out at Phil's too. After the Castle Tilketl campaign, Gronan mourned the loss of each and every one of his troopers that had gotten killed carrying out the mission he'd been given. The campaign had been a howling success, restoring strategic fluidity to the stalled Northwest Frontier campaign, and he got a medal and a promotion. He still felt terrible about the casualties he'd taken, and it took him several weeks - both in real time and in game time - to get over the losses.

That's what we thought was 'wargaming', and 'role-playing', back then.

Well, I approve of your wargaming.
I can only say that I've never even seen it on a wargaming table around here. Well, that's actually wrong, I've seen it - the guy who did that was getting mocked by the other players for lamenting his troops, though.
It probably didn't help that this was a Warhammer game.

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

[From AsenRG:]
BTW, Gronan, that story tells of an impressive win. I assume the German tanks had at least some stat advantage against US tanks under the rules?

The rules didn't enter into it, although "Tractics" is a very good set indeed. Historically, WWII German armor and weapons systems enjoyed a normal 5:1 advantage over Allied equipment; in Normandy, for example, it was considered 'normal wastage' for Allied tank formations to lose a platoon of four or five tanks for every one German tank destroyed. The infantry was just as good; see also Dupuy and Dupuy, where they came to the very unpleasant conclusion (based on the evidence) that each German soldier three times more combat-effective then one US or UK soldier - and almost 200 time more effective then a Soviet soldier.

So, yeah, I guess that was a pretty impressive win to that fight.

In the spirit of sharing sources, I'll note that my own tactics have always been based on what little I've been able to understand and apply by the treaties of Sir Basil Liddle-Hart, Sun Tzu, Wu Tzu, Sun Bing, Von Klausewitz, and whatever I've been able to find translated from Bansenshukai. I don't think I have nearly as impressive wins, though.

Try the Griffith translation and commentary of the Sun Tzu Ping Fa; he's a US Marine general, and has a fascinating perspective on the book.

Practice. Just practice. I've been at this for a while.

Me, I want to ask you something about climate. What would "winter" be in Tekumel? Is there a non-active part of the year? (I'd expect people not working in the hottest months, instead, and only going out at night, unless it can't be helped).

You have it quite well, actually. Summers are torrid, and nobody really tries to do much of anything - it's the dry season, in most areas. Winters are much nicer and cooler, and are also often the 'wet' or 'monsoon' season. Think India or Southeast Asia, and you can't go far wrong.

Didn't Dupuy and Dupuy get to the conclusion that it was the German General Staff that was the deciding factor in that superiority, especially at infantry level? Sure, superior armour helped, but when you put instead of the German General Staff a wargamer, that's an advantage you should expect to suddenly evaporate (unless the other wargamer is a German General Staffer, but that's a particular, and I believe, not really popular case ).

Now, defeating those tanks is still really impressive! I'm just wondering about Dupuy and Dupuy (which I admit I haven't read, just found a synopsis - and it didn't help making me interested, especially since he seems to base his research at individual level on comparing the German to the Swiss mercenaries...in battles where the German mercenaries were equipped according to the Swiss model. And based on this he proceeds to discard the individual level, which I find an unsupported conclusion).

I promise to practice, too! But it's hard to find opponents. Maybe I should look on Internet.

And lately, it might amuse you that this month's Open RPG Day in Sofia (it's a bi/tri-monthly event) has a "theme" for the games. The theme is "winter tales".
I'm planning to run Tekumel. "Winter tales" in Tekumel are going to be different from those in other places. Much busier time of the year, for one...



Both Gronan and Chirine: what do you think about that book?
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...-of-Braunstein

Originally Posted by Hrugga

Let me say that from what I've read of To Serve The Petal Throne really gave me insight into Chirine baKal. Those adventures really impressed me. I felt like I was reading a pulp era Sword and Sorcery tale. Ingenious solutions to problems. Sometimes so simple it blew me away. The humor and smoothness of Lord Chirine is classic. A true Hero of the Age worthy of having songs sung in his honor. Uncle a hundred thanks for an eye opening experience.



More questions coming...Thanks.

H :0)

PS Thanks to The Glorious General and all who have helped make this thread a pleasure to read. So much to learn, so little time.

PSS Keep writing Uncle...

Yeah, that was my first reaction to the TStPT as well. "Much like other Sword and Planet stories, better written than most of them."
And I like the character better, he seems to combine brains and brawn without sliding in nihilism.

[From AsenRG:]Yes, there are games aimed specifically at one-shots, these days. Some of them are pretty good.
Then again, there are games aimed specifically at longer campaigns. The demand hasn't gone away. It's just that the market tries to accommodate both groups, because you know, it's a market. It wants everyone's money!
(Fun fact: one-shot RPGs are, from what I know, the rule in places like Japan. I think it says much more about the schedules of Japanese gamers being hard to coordinate, and/or about them consuming more "episode-based media" that they want to emulate, than it says about their dedication to the games).

Fascinating! I could never get into one-shots; it always had to be a continuing campaign for it to hold my attention.

Well, I approve of your wargaming.
I can only say that I've never even seen it on a wargaming table around here. Well, that's actually wrong, I've seen it - the guy who did that was getting mocked by the other players for lamenting his troops, though.
It probably didn't help that this was a Warhammer game.

Agreed. I've always played that way; never did get into Warhammer, really. Nice figures, some of them, but the setting and the antics of some of the players put me off.

Didn't Dupuy and Dupuy get to the conclusion that it was the German General Staff that was the deciding factor in that superiority, especially at infantry level? Sure, superior armour helped, but when you put instead of the German General Staff a wargamer, that's an advantage you should expect to suddenly evaporate (unless the other wargamer is a German General Staffer, but that's a particular, and I believe, not really popular case ).

I don't know about the General Staff aspect of it, but what I was thinking of was the German small-unit training and esprit that was built up. And frankly, most of the wargamers I've faced over the years have spent too much time reading rules sets and not enough time reading history.

Now, defeating those tanks is still really impressive! I'm just wondering about Dupuy and Dupuy (which I admit I haven't read, just found a synopsis - and it didn't help making me interested, especially since he seems to base his research at individual level on comparing the German to the Swiss mercenaries...in battles where the German mercenaries were equipped according to the Swiss model. And based on this he proceeds to discard the individual level, which I find an unsupported conclusion).

I think I'd agree with that. Their analysis is best when they stick to WWI and the plethora of research materials. Earlier periods, I'm doubtful.

I promise to practice, too! But it's hard to find opponents. Maybe I should look on Internet.
And lately, it might amuse you that this month's Open RPG Day in Sofia (it's a bi/tri-monthly event) has a "theme" for the games. The theme is "winter tales".
I'm planning to run Tekumel. "Winter tales" in Tekumel are going to be different from those in other places. Much busier time of the year, for one...

Oh, what fun - let me know if you need anything!


Both Gronan and Chirine: what do you think about that book?
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...-of-Braunstein

Ah, it's a sore point with me. The authors had heard of the Braunsteins, but didn't know that Dave is still alive - or how to spell his name. A few of us mentioned this to him, and he got in touch with them and worked something out. I don't know if the thing is any good; I;ve been told that there's very little 'Braunstein' in it, but that it is a good little set of medieval rules.

You can use any set of rules you want to play a Braunstein - I've talked about this quite a lot on both my blog and a couple of Intenet forums. It's a play style, not a set of rules. I learned from the good Major - he's suggested that I write something for him on how to play Tekumel-based Braunsteins...


Yeah, that was my first reaction to the TStPT as well. "Much like other Sword and Planet stories, better written than most of them."
And I like the character better, he seems to combine brains and brawn without sliding in nihilism.

Thank you! My alter-ego does have very firm beliefs, ethics, and morals, and tries very hard to live by them. And, I've mentioned, thinks his way out of the situation a often as he can...

Originally Posted by Hrugga

Agreed. Chirine baKal is Lan(khomoyi) personified!!! A true pleasure to read. Just plain fun!!!

H :0)

Thank you! This, in a nutshell, is what I'm trying to do. Provide a little light reading, with heaps of fun; not a 'serious work', not an 'academic paper'. This is a bunch of friends in a basement having some fun...

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

Fascinating! I could never get into one-shots; it always had to be a continuing campaign for it to hold my attention.

Well, it's not that you can't play a campaign with those games. You just make each session self-contained.

Agreed. I've always played that way; never did get into Warhammer, really. Nice figures, some of them, but the setting and the antics of some of the players put me off.

Funny, those were my reasons not to get into it as well. Well, that, and I don't actually like painting.

I don't know about the General Staff aspect of it, but what I was thinking of was the German small-unit training and esprit that was built up. And frankly, most of the wargamers I've faced over the years have spent too much time reading rules sets and not enough time reading history.

Make that "most gamers" to include RPG players, and I'd agree fully!

I think I'd agree with that. Their analysis is best when they stick to WWI and the plethora of research materials. Earlier periods, I'm doubtful.

Glad to see my gut instinct was, in all likelyhood, right. I'd try to get his WWI book(s), then.

Oh, what fun - let me know if you need anything!

Well, I've been thinking to ask you about it...
Can you think of a superstition that has to do with the winter period (or conversely - the summer...), or the Year's End?

Ah, it's a sore point with me. The authors had heard of the Braunsteins, but didn't know that Dave is still alive - or how to spell his name. A few of us mentioned this to him, and he got in touch with them and worked something out. I don't know if the thing is any good; I;ve been told that there's very little 'Braunstein' in it, but that it is a good little set of medieval rules.

I might buy it at the reduced price, and we'll see...

You can use any set of rules you want to play a Braunstein - I've talked about this quite a lot on both my blog and a couple of Intenet forums. It's a play style, not a set of rules. I learned from the good Major - he's suggested that I write something for him on how to play Tekumel-based Braunsteins...

I'd fully support the idea of a Road Map To Tekumel Braunsteins As Practiced By Chirine baKal!

Thank you! My alter-ego does have very firm beliefs, ethics, and morals, and tries very hard to live by them. And, I've mentioned, thinks his way out of the situation a often as he can...

That's the best way to a good, mostly healthy life!

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Well, I've been thinking to ask you about it...
Can you think of a superstition that has to do with the winter period (or conversely - the summer...), or the Year's End?

I'd fully support the idea of a Road Map To Tekumel Braunsteins As Practiced By Chirine baKal!

Ask away! Let me think - there's the Circle Dance in the Nyemesel Isles, and a lot more, so I'll look.

I'll talk to Dave...